Atom N450 vs Celeron M 560

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 560 and Atom N450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MIntel Atom
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Pinetrail (2009−2010)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)21 December 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$64
Current price$49 $348 (5.4x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 560 and Atom N450 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads12
Base clock speedno data1.66 GHz
Boost clock speed2.13 GHz1.66 GHz
Bus support533 MHz533 MHz
L1 cache64 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm45 nm
Die size143 mm266 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors291 Million123 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 560 and Atom N450 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1
SocketPPGA478FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt5.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Atom N450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

Celeron M 560 and Atom N450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 560 and Atom N450 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and Atom N450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR2
Maximum memory sizeno data2 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel GMA 3150

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron M 560 535
+164%
Atom N450 203

Celeron M 560 outperforms Atom N450 by 164% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron M 560 2008
+259%
Atom N450 560

Celeron M 560 outperforms Atom N450 by 259% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron M 560 2008
+132%
Atom N450 865

Celeron M 560 outperforms Atom N450 by 132% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 May 2008 21 December 2009
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 5 Watt

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Atom N450. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Atom N450, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron M 560
Celeron M 560
Intel Atom N450
Atom N450

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 40 votes

Rate Celeron M 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 161 vote

Rate Atom N450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 560 or Atom N450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.